1979-09-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

122 Mr. Albro remarked any new information presented by the applicant or the neighborhoOd would invite rebuttal and to get a full airing it would seem that the Council would have to go through the Whole process or another public hearing. On motion by Mr, Gatewood, seconded by Mrs. O'Brien the recommendation of the Planning Commission was unanimously adopted. Mr. Albro remarked that in his judgement the neighborhood association was extremely well organized at the public hearing. He thought the facts were presented in a very understandable form and in a dispassionate fashion. He stated that during his time on Council it was clearly, the best performance by a neighborhood association in a zoning. He stated he would suspect there would no more attactive shopping center built in this City than the one proposed by Safeway and the effort made by Safeway from an architectural standpoint to have as little adverse effect on the neighborhood as possible ~is commendable. He thinks the developer is to commended for the effort made to cooperate with' the neighborhood association and in his judgement Safeway's conduct in this regard for a commercial developer is a model to be followed in the City. It doesn't happen very often, but Safeway has alot to be proud of in so far as how its real estate department approached this project. His chief concern throughout the hearing was traffiC and the impact on the neighborhood in terms of the intensity of the potential develop- ment. Under the B-3 zoning. He feels that a very adequate and prOfessional presentation was made by both sides and he thinks there is much to be said fo~ each expert involved. He thinks there was too much in terms of the intensity of the potential development under this zoning and the scale it would have on the neighborhood. He feels that there was a very adequate and professional presentation made by both sides, but he feels there was sufficient believable information provided regarding the traffic impact onthe neighborhood to force him to side against the rezoning. He is not going to vote against the rezoning without misgivings since he feels that we have lost a first Class developer in Safeway and would like to think Safeway could locate elsewhere. He stated that what he fears in making this decision is that the owner of the property will be forced to develop it under B-2 uses and he is not convinced that the B-2 uses are going to be to anybody's liking particularly from the impact they will have on the residential uses across the street. If indeed the property is developed under B-2 we might find in the long run we would be better off with Safeway since B-2 uses are not necessarily conducive' to the neighborhood atmosphere anymore then B'3. There is sufficient doubt~in his mind as to the impact on health, welfare and safety so that he will have to vote against the rezoning.